Delhi High Court Rejects Somnath Bharti’s Plea In Election Case Against Bansuri Swaraj

The Delhi High Court has rejected AAP leader Somnath Bharti’s petition, delivering a legal setback to the former Delhi Law Minister. Bharti sought permission to file a reply in his election petition against BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj, but Justice Anees Dayal dismissed his request. The court emphasized the importance of discipline in legal proceedings and refused to waste judicial time on delays.

Court Criticizes Somnath Bharti’s Delay

During the hearing, Bharti claimed he had not received Swaraj’s written statement. However, the court dismissed his argument, stating, “This is a court, not a post office. Judicial time cannot be wasted.” Swaraj’s lawyer, Rajiv Sharma, informed the court that the reply was submitted on time. Bharti, in response, argued that he was occupied with elections and was unaware of the submission. The court remained firm, stating that legal processes must be followed without unnecessary delays.

Allegations Of Electoral Malpractices

Somnath Bharti has accused Swaraj and her election agent of engaging in electoral malpractices during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. In his petition, he alleged that on May 25, 2024, BJP workers, under Swaraj’s direction, distributed money, sarees, and salwar suits to lure voters. According to Bharti, AAP workers and local residents objected, but the distribution of materials continued.

The petition further stated that on polling day, Swaraj’s agents carried pamphlets displaying her ballot paper number, photo, election symbol, and a picture of PM Modi. Bharti also alleged that BSP candidate Raj Kumar Anand was strategically fielded by the BJP to benefit Swaraj. Anand, a former AAP minister, allegedly resigned under pressure from agencies and later joined the BJP after contesting on a BSP ticket.

With the High Court dismissing Bharti’s plea, the case will proceed without his additional response. The ruling highlights the judiciary’s strict stance on maintaining procedural discipline in election-related cases.

Also Read: Supreme Court Ruling: No Need For Injuries To Prove Rape In 40-Year-Old Case